Crysis developer Crytek has denied claims it is on the verge of bankruptcy.

A recent report from German magazine GameStar claimed Crytek, which has its headquarters in Frankfurt, was in financial trouble and that the development of Xbox One exclusive Ryse: Son of Rome had been a "disaster".

Our colleagues at Eurogamer Germany looked into the report, and gave me the following translation:

"'The vultures are circling already,' so says a leading employee of one of the large publishers. Companies like this have already started making offers to the most talented people at Crytek, to hire them away. Such a brain drain can become dangerous for any studio, even a financially stable one.

"A takeover of Crytek would be interesting for a company, that could use the development-experience of the Crytek and doesn't want to build up such experience itself. That is why the Belarus F2P-giant Wargaming is rumoured to be a potential buyer.

"When you are reading this, there is hope that Crytek has managed to avoid disaster. A new source of money, said Avni Yerli [one of the managing directors], is in sight. When we called him in early June, the contract had not yet been signed, but will be in a short while. 'Not all is good. Our transition to become a F2P-studio had been painful. But all that is now behind us.'"

Responding to our enquiries, Crytek dismissed the GameStar report.

A Crytek spokesperson issued Eurogamer the following statement:

"Regardless of what some media are reporting, mostly based on a recent article published by GameStar, the information in those reports and in the GameStar article itself are rumors which Crytek deny.

"We continue to focus on the development and publishing of our upcoming titles Homefront: The Revolution, Hunt: Horrors of the Gilded Age, Arena of Fate, and Warface, as well as providing ongoing support for our CryEngine and its licensees.

"We have received a lot of positive feedback during and after E3 from both gaming press and gamers, and would like to thank our loyal employees, fans and business partners for their continuous support."

Crytek has a number of studios worldwide, and has recently announced a number of games in development, including Homefront: The Revolution at Crytek UK in Nottingham and Hunt: Horrors of the Gilded Age at Crytek USA in Austin, Texas. It also has a game engine licensing business for CryEngine.

Before E3 one source told Eurogamer staff at Crytek's Sofia office in Bulgaria hadn't received salaries for the past two months.

Eurogamer has also received worrying reports coming out of Crytek UK, which is rumoured to have failed to pay employees on time. Management have been accused by some staff of a lack of transparency over these issues, and many are disgruntled, Eurogamer has heard.

But Crytek may have secured investment and thus its future - in the short term at least. The GameStar report mentions a potential buyout by World of Tanks maker Wargaming, but Eurogamer has heard investment from a Chinese firm may have been tabled.

Are you an affected Crytek developer? If so, please contact the author of this story, wesley.yinpoole@eurogamer.net to tell your side of the story in confidence.

If Crytek went under, the biggest loss would be their engine. It's a damn fine one. It's a pity Crytek just use it to churn out mediocre games with shiny graphics.

I've never understood this argument. Far Cry and Crysis were both fantastic, and while Crysis 2 wasn't amazing, it was much better than mediocre. Ryse, I'd argue, is their only mediocre game -- all the rest have been above average. Similarly, they pushed the boundaries in gameplay on their first two games as well as graphics. I think they got caught in the trap of trying to fit with what's popular on the next three (Crysis 2, Crysis 3 and Ryse) and forgot why people loved their games so much in the first place.

I've never understood this argument. Far Cry and Crysis were both fantastic, and while Crysis 2 wasn't amazing, it was much better than mediocre. Ryse, I'd argue, is their only mediocre game -- all the rest have been above average. Similarly, they pushed the boundaries in gameplay on their first two games as well as graphics. I think they got caught in the trap of trying to fit with what's popular on the next three (Crysis 2, Crysis 3 and Ryse) and forgot why people loved their games so much in the first place.

While Far Cry was great, I found Crysis to be thoroughly mediocre once you looked past the shiny graphics.

While Far Cry was great, I found Crysis to be thoroughly mediocre once you looked past the shiny graphics.

To each his own, but the overwhelming majority of reviewers disagreed completely. The graphics were great, but there were quite a few unique features as well (the power suit, the gun modifications, etc.), along with a refinement of the open-world nature of Far Cry. While obviously you disagree, I thought the gameplay was tremendous -- there were tons of ways to go at a level, something a lot of game developers promise but never deliver.

I've never understood this argument. Far Cry and Crysis were both fantastic, and while Crysis 2 wasn't amazing, it was much better than mediocre. Ryse, I'd argue, is their only mediocre game -- all the rest have been above average. Similarly, they pushed the boundaries in gameplay on their first two games as well as graphics. I think they got caught in the trap of trying to fit with what's popular on the next three (Crysis 2, Crysis 3 and Ryse) and forgot why people loved their games so much in the first place.

I still enjoy playing Crysis even today; the graphics are amazing, the storytelling is above mediocre, the gameplay is wonderful and the suit + environment are very innovative. I don't understand the hate towards this game; it set a new standard and while very hardware heavy, it pushed the expectations when gamers play a game: they wanted to shine it like Crysis.

Really don't wish this to be true. While not the most brilliant story-driven games, overall they are good titles. They need to make use of the old Free Radical team and just release a new Timesplitters game, bam crisis averted - company saved! Yay!

I'll still never forget playing Far Cry for the first time. it felt like that one came out of left field and surprised everyone.

Fry Cry was MIND BLOWING good when it came out.

None of the crysis games have lived up to it afterwords. It was pure magic of open world island themes, giving you complete freedom!

It is very hard to stay on such a bleeding edge for long. Crysis 1 was great, but it was absolutely impossible to run it well, even on my expensive gaming PC when it first came out. I gave up when I got to a barge wiht lots of machinery arriving, and everything going to 2-3 frames a second..... then I relalised I needed to play on low settings ((((

Crysis 2 was meh. Crysis 3 was not interesting. I love the way the far cry series went without crytek a lot better.

Of all the crysis games, first one was by far the best. Problem is not many could appreciate it in time!

To each his own, but the overwhelming majority of reviewers disagreed completely. The graphics were great, but there were quite a few unique features as well (the power suit, the gun modifications, etc.), along with a refinement of the open-world nature of Far Cry. While obviously you disagree, I thought the gameplay was tremendous -- there were tons of ways to go at a level, something a lot of game developers promise but never deliver.

The gameplay in Crysis was terrible and the graphics were nowhere near as good as people claimed. Far Cry 2 had a much better engine, better gameplay and better narrative. Crysis 2 moved things in the right direction by actually adding a plot, though it made the game more linear.

I never completed Crysis because I found the experience far too tedious. It was just a sandbox shooter, only the shooting part wasn't very enjoyable. Ubisoft Montreal is by far the better studio.

Again, to each his own, but I thought Far Cry 2 was an insult to the original game. It added completely unnecessary and tedious mechanics like malaria and weapon degrading while dumbing down the gameplay to make the missions completely forgettable. I don't know how anyone can say that was better than the original Far Cry or Crysis, but maybe the more open-ended aspect of the game is more appealing to others than it is me. It left such a bad taste in my mouth I didn't even give Far Cry 3 a shot.

As far as graphics go, I don't see how anyone can rationally say Crysis had overrated graphics from a technological or aesthetic standpoint.

Why the hell would Crytek be close to bankrupt? They got paid for Ryse by MS, i'm sure quite handsomely. And it was a great game, to boot. I liked all their games, even if they were not pure masterpieces. Actually always thought Far Cry was overrated, they really hit their stride with Crysis.